SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KUBRA BEE W/O LATE YOUSUF ALI AND ANR – Appellant
Versus
VEERSHETTY S/O MANIKAPA MARKHALE AND ANR – Respondent
MFA/30070/2013



1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

KALABURAGI BENCH

DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2018

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE P.G.M.PATIL

MFA NO.30070/2013 (MV)

BETWEEN:

1.

Kubra Bee W/o Late Yousuf Ali,

Age: 30 years, Occ: Household,

2.

Vazir Bee W/o Shaik Ahmed,

Age: 54 years, Occ: Household,

3.

Shaik Ahmed S/o Ali Sab Pinjar,

Age: 57 years, Occ: Labour,

All are R/o Kadwad, Tq: Bidar-585401.

... Appellants

(By Sri.Basavaraj R.Math, Advocate)

AND:

1.

Veershetty S/o Manikappa Markhale,

Age: Major, Occ: Business,

R/o H.No.104, Kadwad

Tq: Bidar – 585 401.

(owner of Lorry No.AP-12/U-2214)

2. The Manager,

Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd.,

Walchand Hirachand Marg, Mumbai

Through its Branch Manager, Branch/

Division Office No.4,

2

8th Block Asian Plaza, Station Road,

Gulbarga Near S.V.Patel Chowk 585 101.

(Vide Policy No.109001334529 Cover Note

No.1407782334003178)

(Valid from 13-02-2010 to 12-02-2011)

... Respondents

(By Smt.Preeti Patil Melkundi Advocate for R-2)

(Notice to R1 dispensed with V/O dt.25/08/2014)

This MFA filed under Section 173 (1) of MV Act against

the judgment and award dated: 18-11-2011 passed in MVC

No.32/2010 on the file of Prl. Senior Civil Judge & MACT II

at Bidar partly allowing the petition & seeking for

enhancement of compensation.

This appeal coming for orders on this day, the Court

delivered the following:

JUDGMENT

Though the matter is posted for Orders, it is taken

up for hearing.

2.

Heard the learned counsel for appellants and

respondent No.2/Insurance Company.

3.

This

appeal

is

preferred

against

the

Judgment and award dated: 18-11-2011 passed by Prl.

3

Senior Civil Judge & MACT No.II at Bidar in M.V.C

No.32/2010 awarding compensation of Rs.4,83,000/-

with interest at the rate of 6% per annum to the

claimants/appellants.

4.

The claimants/appellants have stated in the

claim petition before the Tribunal that, the deceased

Yousuf /husband of claimant No.1 and son to claimant

Nos.2 & 3 met with motor vehicle accident on 10-05-

2010, at 9.15 p.m., on Bidar - Mannaekheli road at

Chatnalli cross, due to user of Lorry bearing Reg.

No.AP-12/U-2214, being driven by the driver of the said

vehicle in a rash and negligent manner. The Bagdal

police have registered a case in Crime No.84/2010

against the driver of the said vehicle. The claimants

have stated that, the deceased was hale and healthy

and working as a Milk vendor and coolie and earning

Rs.8,000/- per month. Due to untimely death, they

4

have lost their dependency. Therefore they have

claimed compensation of Rs.17,80,000/-.

5.

Respondent No.1 though appeared before the

Tribunal,

did

not

file

any

written

statement.

Respondent No.2 appeared and filed written statement

and contested the matter. It was contended that, the

compensation claimed by the claimants is on the higher

side. The liability of the insurer is subject to the terms

and conditions of the policy and also the driver holding

valid and effective driving license. There is violation of

Policy condition and the Driver or claimants have not

produce any necessary documents of vehicle in

question, permission U/Sec.170 of M.V.Act is sought

for. On these grounds it is prayed to dismiss the

petition.

6.

The Tribunal on the basis of the pleadings

framed the Issues.

5

7. The claimant No.1 was examined as PW.1 and

got

marked

documents

Ex.P.1

to

Ex.P.5.

The

respondent No.2-company has not produced any

documents nor produced any oral evidence.

8. The Tribunal after hearing both the sides

passed

the

impugned

Judgment

by

awarding

compensation of Rs.4,83,000/- with interest at the rate

of 6% per annum from the date of petition till

realization.

9.

The

learned

counsel

appearing

for

claimants/appellants submits before this court that, the

income of the deceased taken at Rs.3,500/- per month

is on the lower side and that the Tribunal ought to have

taken the income of the deceased at Rs.8,000/-

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top